Domestication and growth hormone transgenesis cause similar changes in gene expression in coho salmon ( <i>Oncorhynchus kisutch</i> )
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Domestication has been extensively used in agricultural animals to modify phenotypes such as growth rate. More recently, transgenesis of growth factor genes [primarily growth hormone (GH)] has also been explored as a rapid approach to accelerating performance of agricultural species. Growth rates of many fishes respond dramatically to GH gene transgenesis, whereas genetic engineering of domestic mammalian livestock has resulted in relatively modest gains. The most dramatic effects of GH transgenesis in fish have been seen in relatively wild strains that have undergone little or no selection for enhanced growth, whereas genetic modification of livestock necessarily has been performed in highly domesticated strains that already possess very rapid growth. Such fast-growing domesticates may be refractory to further stimulation if the same regulatory pathways are being exploited by both genetic approaches. By directly comparing gene expression in wild-type, domestic, and GH transgenic strains of coho salmon, we have found that domestication and GH transgenesis are modifying similar genetic pathways. Genes in many different physiological pathways show modified expression in domestic and GH transgenic strains relative to wild-type, but effects are strongly correlated. Genes specifically involved in growth regulation (IGF1, GHR, IGF-II, THR) are also concordantly regulated in domestic and transgenic fish, and both strains show elevated levels of circulating IGF1. Muscle expression of GH in nontransgenic strains was found to be elevated in domesticated fish relative to wild type, providing a possible mechanism for growth enhancement. These data have implications for genetic improvement of existing domesticated species and risk assessment and regulation of emerging transgenic strains.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".